User talk:Ardeshire Babakan
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, Ardeshire Babakan, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Cf38 (talk) 13:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] November 2007
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to User:Demonapocalypse, are considered vandalism and immediately reverted. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Blueboy96 13:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Reply Barnstar
You´re most welcome, you will have a bright future, Good Luck! Cyrus111 23:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Warning
Except the edits that you call it "relocating the texts", the others violate the previous consenus or are blatant deletion of sources. Even you delete captions of pictures without giving any reasons. Then you blindly reverted my edits as if you own the article. Please have a more mature attidue in dealing with other users. --Pejman47 (talk) 13:02, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- and this is the location of the poll for the pictures: [[1]]--Pejman47 (talk) 13:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- The size of the article is not at all an important factor of FA status, the factual accuracy and full coverage of subject is the defining factors. And after all , I don't think that FA status is a big deal; If you know what I mean.
- If you have any concerns about the accuracy of some of the claims in the article, please feel free and discuss it in its talk page. But removing the sources from the lead for "shortening the article" or changing the pictures without prior discussion is not appropriate, cheers. --Pejman47 (talk) 15:29, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- I didn't see you around today. I hope, you didn't become disappointed from WP. If you feel that some sentences are redunant in that article, please list them in the talk page one by one. I am sure with the help of other users we can improve its quality.--Pejman47 (talk) 18:13, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- please refrain from any dramatic edit, please discuss any important change that you make in the article and try to make "everybody happy"; although I am sure it is hard.
- By the way the article is already have GA status and I don't think FA is a big deal. And again as I said before the length of the article is not an important factor for the FA status. Besides that I do NOT think the size of article is now big, for example United States 'article is 150KB. --Pejman47 (talk) 05:46, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't see you around today. I hope, you didn't become disappointed from WP. If you feel that some sentences are redunant in that article, please list them in the talk page one by one. I am sure with the help of other users we can improve its quality.--Pejman47 (talk) 18:13, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Second warning
Please do not change the pictures that we had consensus for them. Here: [2] both of what you said is wrong. There was a reason that the picture of Ismail I was selected to be in Iran's article, and I am afraid by saying that "Naser al-din was more important", you have shown that you have no clear understanding of Iran's history. Also, if loss of land is the factor for being included, it must be Fat′h Ali Shah Qajar. --Pejman47 (talk) 15:39, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- regardless of your reasoning, you should discuss your changes in the talk page and try to change the previous image consensus and then change them. Which I think you have not done it by now.
- and Naser al-din only lost Herat, other parts of Afghanistan was in control of British forces or Afghan Kings by the time he started ruling Iran. --Pejman47 (talk) 16:53, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- First, the highschool books are NOT reliable sources for history in any country!.
- Ismaill is the founder of Safavid Dynasti, the main creator of what is current Iran. You are advised to read its wiki article, at least.
- There was a consensus about some pictures of that article, unless you have a new one, regardless of your reasoning, you may not change them. You may invite the people that participated in the previous consensus (around 10 users) to rethink their previous choices. insisting on unilaterally changing the article to what you perceive is the better version is an insult to the participants of previous poll. Sincerely, --Pejman47 (talk) 21:41, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- you didn't change only the order of sentences, you deleted: "via the treaties of Gulistan, Turkmenchay, and Akhal" didn't you?--Pejman47 (talk) 14:27, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] 3rr
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Iran. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. --Pejman47 (talk) 21:41, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Persian Gulf
Thank you for adding the Infobox to Persian Gulf. However, please do not move/remove/merge the page's sections and sub-sections without a clear consensus on talk page, as this is a sensitive topic which is under mediation at the moment. --Sia34 (talk) 19:24, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- Please be patient and build consensus on discussion page, and allow time for the mediation to colclude, before making any major changes.--Sia34 (talk) 23:16, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- You were reverted multiple times. If it was a slight disagreement that could have easily been resolved, I would not have protected the page. Given the prior situation with the article, I felt it was best to err on the side of caution. However, it seems no discussion has taken place on the talk page, so I have now unprotected the page. Nishkid64 (talk) 21:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Hi
Khubi? Do you have Gmail talk or any other messenger. If yes, can you please tell me what your ID is, I need to talk to you. --07fan (talk) 12:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] RE: Iran mistake
Hello Ardeshire, thanks for the clarification on my talk page. No hurt done. SSZ (talk) 00:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Barnstar
Hi Ardeshire: thanks for the Tireless Editor barnstar.. my first one! Zatoichi26 (talk) 00:44, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
